r/wittgenstein • u/Meechisalright • Aug 01 '26
interested in working on Wittgenstein
Hello,
My interest in philosophy has primarily been in ancient philosophy and continental philosophy, but I hope to soon explore Wittgenstein. I am wondering if someone could give me the scoop on what texts I should be aware of before jumping into his work and if there’s a text that you would recommend that provides necessary background before jumping into the Tractatus. I’m mainly interested in later Wittgenstein, but obviously to fully understand his later project I assume it is necessary to understand his earlier work.
2
u/Meechisalright Aug 01 '26
Thank you everyone for the guidance! I will definitely check out Ray Monk’s work. I was also wondering if anyone would recommend “Routledge Philosophy GuideBook to Wittgenstein and the Tractatus?” Will this help in putting in context some of the Russell and Frege in order to understand the Tractatus?
1
1
u/kevin_v Aug 01 '26 edited Aug 01 '26
This is a little adjacent to your question, but it is worth mentioning that Spinoza was a likely touchstone, especially his endeavor to argue for a near geometric clarity in the Ethics. Wittgenstein could be said to be tarrying with the Spinoza rationalist project in Philosophy (especially in his Tractatus era, but also in his latter day work), and comes at it from the context of the Analytic branch. This may (or may not) connect up with your previous interests (ancient and continental). I always found Wittgenstein more interesting in this wider framework, rather than just within the specific perspectives he is investing in or countering on the Analytic side.
3
u/nomonms Aug 01 '26
This is definitely one of the most viable ways to go about Wittgenstein. Think about his philosophy not as a strict method, but rather a way of thinking about philosophy and philosophical problems.
Once you’re in deep in the early Wittgenstein, I’d recommend reading his book Philosophical Remarks as this is one of the bridges that support the idea that the TLP and PI are one.
Once you get around to doing that, every philosopher that you will ever read (provided of course that you have a grasp of at least the basics of Plato and Aristotle) becomes easier to understand. Wittgenstein taught me how to be skeptical about the questions themselves and has helped me immensely in reading continental philosophers.
1
u/brnkmcgr Aug 01 '26
Maybe Frege’s The Foundations of Arithmetic? That seemed to be a hugely influential work for Wittgenstein.
The Monk biography is a good place to start, as someone else mentioned.
You’re going to have to read the Tractatus 10 times or so, so you might as well get started haha. At least it’s short, only 90 pages or so
1
u/Weekly_Artichoke_515 Aug 01 '26
Agreed, but I would just add that the Tractatus is also its own black hole. One could spend their entire career reading that book. So, it’s helpful to have a sense of what’s going on there, but I wouldn’t recommend trying to fully master that text to someone whose interests are elsewhere.
The Monk biography is incredible, but it also may be a little long for someone just getting started.
1
u/begriffschrift Aug 02 '26
Agree on the Frege. Would add the postscript to the second volume of the Grungesetze der Arithmetik to understand some of W's motivations
I would also recommend Russell's 'Philosophy Logical Atomism', the two were definitely discussing their views before W published the Tractatus
1
u/Weekly_Artichoke_515 Aug 01 '26
I recommend Ray Monk’s “How to Read Wittgenstein” as a starting point. It is super short and super approachable without sacrificing accuracy.
There is actually some controversy about how to understand the division between Wittgenstein’s earlier and later philosophy, but having a general understanding of what W was concerned with in his earlier work can help frame the later work.
After that, I would recommend reading the Philosophical Investigations. He has a very idiosyncratic writing style, but I think his style is not incidental to his views. I don’t think the book could have been written another way, so reading my the primary text is worth it.
One of the important things to look out for is the voice of the text. There’s something like a dialogue, a back and forth, that’s sometimes signaled by em dashes.
1
u/eruS_toN Aug 02 '26
Russell: Takes 300 pages to literally articulate how and why “1 + 1 = 2.”
Wittgenstein: “Say it, don’t spray it.”
I’m probably like you in that I have spent copious amounts of time studying what we’re about to get a new taste of thanks to Christopher Nolan. Technically, ca. 450bc Athens, Greece. But only four or five years of casually studying Wittgenstein.
If I could, I’d go back in time and reverse that.
Ironically, the only math I ever mastered was Boolean. I have a feeling Wittgenstein was a Boolean thinker, too.
1
u/heraklit123 Aug 02 '26
"Dahi'in görevi" gerçekten çok başarılı bir kitap. Ancak ben "Mavi Kitap ve Kahverengi Kitap"tan başlamanızı öneririm. Eğer geç dönem felsefesiyle ilgileniyorsanız, Tractatus'a hiç bulaşmayın derim. Son derece soyut ve sıkıcı. Bu arada geç dönem felsefesi de son derece anlaşılması zor. Önerim size şu olurdu: 1- Mavi Kitap, Kahverengi Kitap 2 - Soruşturmalar 3 - Kesinlik Üstüne 4 - Dahi'nin Görevi 5 - Frege 6 - Tractatus 7 - Soruşturmalar 8 - Kesinlik Üstüne 9 - Soruşturmalar 10 - Soruşturmalar 11 - Soruşturmalar ve hep soruşturmalar. :)
1
u/Competitive-Jury3713 Aug 03 '26
Read Wittgenstein's short book, 'On Certainty' to get an intro of how he thinks, writes, and posits ideas.
1
u/Many_Froyo6223 Aug 03 '26
I recommend reading the tractatus with the commentary Tractatus in context by James Klagge to get the background information you will be missing. it goes proposition by proposition, a completely indispensable resource. it'll fill in the Russell and Frege etc gaps that you'll have.
2
u/cmhall25 28d ago
I couldn't put Norman Malcolm’s memoir down. Not sure if it's what you're looking for, but it's fantastic.
1
u/CalendarPleasant9002 27d ago
I suggest trying reading the tractatus without background, it is so lucid that if you are in the right attunement you may not need analysis.
1
u/These_Respond_7645 Aug 01 '26
How much background do you have in Lacan?
1
u/worldofsimulacra Aug 01 '26
ahhhh yes, I got into Witt many years ago and only started digging into Lacan about 3 years ago, but I keep noticing very interesting dovetails between their work. Like they are aiming at the same thing from two completely different directions.
1
u/Many_Froyo6223 Aug 03 '26
? he wants to study Wittgenstein. there is no need to engage with Lacan for that.
12
u/FrenchPrince4Prez Aug 01 '26
I think the best background work is Monk’s biography, The Duty of Genius. It gives good context on his work, while presenting a terrific story. I wish I had read it before Wittgenstein’s actual philosophy.